Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Delhi District Court

Cs No. 1056/16 M/S Affy Group Of ... vs . M/S Aaltramed Health Care Ltd. Page No. ... on 6 June, 2022

   IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE- 03
    EAST DISTRICT, KARKARDOOMA COURTS: DELHI.

                 Pre s i d e d by : SH. RAJESH KUMAR.

Civil Suit No. 10 5 6 / 1 6


M/s Affy Grou p of Com p a n i e s ,
N-101, Anupa m Apartm e n t ,
East Arjun Nagar,
New Delhi- 1100 3 2
                                                       ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . P l a i n t i f f

                                          Ver s u s

(1)     M/s Aaltra m e d Healt h Care Ltd.
        Flat No.101, Plot No. 191 A,
        Opp. JNTU, Weste r n Hills,
        Praga t hi Nagar Road,
        Kukatp ally,
        Hyder a b a d- 5000 8 5
        Andhra Prade s h ,           ........ . . . D e f e n d a n t no. 1


        G Prab h a k a r Rao,
        Director,
        Flat No.101, Plot No. 191 A,
        Opp. JNTU, Weste r n Hills,
        Praga t hi Nagar Road,
        Kukatp ally,
        Hyder a b a d- 5000 8 5
        Andhra Prade s h ,           ........ . . . D e f e n d a n t no. 2


        T. G. Laks h m a n a n ,
        Vice Preside n t,
        Flat No.101, Plot No. 191 A,
        Opp. JNTU, Weste r n Hills,
        Praga t hi Nagar Road,
        Kukatp ally,
        Hyder a b a d- 5000 8 5

CS No. 1056/16   M/s Affy Group of Companies Vs. M/s Aaltramed Health Care Ltd.              Page No. 1 of 10
          Andhra Prade s h                             ........ . . . D e f e n d a n t no. 3
                                            (Dro p p e d fro m array of parti e s
                                            vid e ord e r dat e d 18 . 0 2 . 2 0 2 0 )

         Ram Pra s a d ,
         Presid e n t- Opera tion s,
         Flat No.101, Plot No. 191 A,
         Opp. JNTU, Weste r n Hills,
         Praga t hi Nagar Road,
         Kukatp ally,
         Hyder a b a d- 5000 8 5
         Andhra Prade s h             .... . . . . . . . . D e f e n d a n t no. 4
                                               (Drop p e d fro m array of parti e s
                                                vid e ord e r dat e d 18 . 0 2 . 2 0 2 0 )

         (As per am e n d e d m e m o of parti e s )

                 Date of Institution                            : 21.11. 2 0 1 5
                 Date of Reserving Order                        : 19.05. 2 0 2 2
                 Date of Judgm e n t                            : 06.06. 2 0 2 2


     Suit for rec o v e r y of Rs. 3 9 , 9 7 , 3 6 3 / - (Rup e e s Thirty
Nin e Lakh s S e v e n Thou s a n d Thre e Hundr e d and Sixt y
                  Thre e only ) on be h a l f of plain t iff


CASE OF THE PLAINTIFF


1.               Brief facts of the cas e are that the plaintiff has
filed    the     pres e n t     suit     for     recov ery         for     a       sum     of Rs.
39,97, 3 6 3 /- lakhs agains t the defen d a n t .                     The Affy Group of
Comp a ni e s ( herein aft e r referre d as the plaintiff) consist s of
Affy Phar m a        Pvt. Ltd. which is a com p a n y                              incorpor a t e d
und er     the Comp a ni e s           Act, 1956           and Affy Pare nt e r als                  a
partn e r s hip firm, both having its regist e r e d office at N-101
Anupa m Apart m e n t , East Arjun Nagar, New Delhi- 32.                                        It is

CS No. 1056/16    M/s Affy Group of Companies Vs. M/s Aaltramed Health Care Ltd.       Page No. 2 of 10
 furth er sub mitt e d that plaintiff is involve d in ma n uf a c t u rin g,
mark e ting and trading of Specialty Phar m a c e u tic als having
approxi m a t e annu al turnov e r of over 20 million USD.                                     It is
furth er     sub mitt e d       that      plaintiff is known                  in India         and
Intern a tion ally for man uf a c t u ring all kinds of tablet s, soft
gels, oral liquids, dry syrup, caps ule s , injections, oint m e n t s
etc and has beco m e                   one of the lead e r s                in the trading
healthc a r e     industry and a quality phar m a                            trad e r     of the
country with a global vision.                        It is furth er sub mitt e d that
defe n d a n t   no.     1 M/s Aaltra m e d                 Heat h        Care       Ltd, is a
comp a n y regist e r e d unde r the Comp a ni e s Act, 1956 and
having its regist er e d office at Flat No. 101, Plot No. 191A,
Opp. JNTU, Weste r n Hils, Praga t hi Nagar Road, Kukatp ally,
Hyder a b a d - 5000 8 5 Andhra Prade s h, carrying on inter alia,
phar m a c e u ti c al      busine s s          and        is      dealing           with       the
phar m a c e u ti c al     produc t s         in      India.           Defend a n t          no.2,
defe n d a n t n.3 and defe n d a n t no.4 are the Director, Vice
Presid e n t and the Preside n t- Opera tion s resp e c tiv ely in the
defe n d a n t no.1 Comp a n y.
2.               It is also         sub mitt e d        that      an     agr e e m e n t       was
ent e r e d into by both the parties on 28.03.2 0 1 2 which stat e d
that    pay m e n t      shall be mad e              by the defe n d a n t s              to the
plaintiff within 60 days of receipt of goods.                                      It is furth er
sub mitt e d     that     on the          expiration            of the      agr e e m e n t      on
27.03. 2 0 1 4 , it was orally and mutu ally agr e e d by the partie s
that the pay m e n t will be mad e within a period of 60 days
from the raising of invoice s.                       It is furthe r sub mitt e d that
defe n d a n t s were dealing with the plaintiff since 2012 owing

CS No. 1056/16    M/s Affy Group of Companies Vs. M/s Aaltramed Health Care Ltd.      Page No. 3 of 10
 to its immin e n t            reput a tio n        and      goodwill in high quality
produc t s .       It is further sub mitt e d that initially ther e was a
smoot h relations hip betw e e n the plaintiff and defe n d a n t s ,
howev e r, after som e time, it bec a m e sour due to issue s of
non pay m e n t and the belat e d false allega tion s of defec t e d
produc t s       by the         defe n d a n t s .       It is also sub mitt e d                 that
despit e repe a t e d allega tion s of defec t s and deficiency in the
plaintiff's        goods        by     the      defe n d a n t s ,       defe n d a n t s      have
continu e d to take deliverie s from the plaintiff for further
man uf a c t ur e      of goods.             This suppor t s that fact that the
plaintiff's goods are of good quality and pass the requisite
test    of quality ass ur a n c e .              It is also sub mitt e d                that      the
alleg a tion s of defec t s are mer ely a tactic to avoid making
pay m e n t s for goods alrea dy receive d by the defe n d a n t s .
Relying upon the repre s e n t a ti o n s and ass ur a n c e s that the
defe n d a n t s     ma d e ,      plaintiff supplied                the     phar m a c e u tic al
produc t s as per require m e n t on the promis e that pay m e n t
would be ma d e within 60 days time from receipt s of goods.
It is furth er sub mitt e d that defe n d a n t s again appro a c h e d
the plaintiff in the mont h of July, 2014 for supply of som e
phar m a c e u ti c al pre p a r a tion s wher ein the plaintiff in good
faith, diligently supplied the said produc t s agains t various
invoices.          It is further sub mitt e d that the invoice s num b e r s
0014, 0630 and 2424 were not men tion e d                                            in the legal
notice sent to the defe n d a n t s due to an inadv e r t e n t error.
The total unpaid balanc e out of thes e invoice s stan d s at
Rs.36,5 7, 3 7 9/- . It is furth er sub mitt e d that despit e repe a t e d
remind e r s of pending pay m e n t s , the plaintiff plea s have

CS No. 1056/16      M/s Affy Group of Companies Vs. M/s Aaltramed Health Care Ltd.      Page No. 4 of 10
 fallen on de af ears.               The defe n d a n t has, in an arbitrary and
forceful man n e r withh eld the mon e y which was legitima t ely
due to plaintiff for the goods rightfully deliver e d                                        by the
plaintiff, rec eive d by the defen d a n t s and sold furthe r by the
defe n d a n t s .       Plaintiff requ e s t e d           the defe n d a n t s         to mak e
pay m e n t but on one pret e x t or the other the defen d a n t s
deferr e d the sa m e .                It is furthe r sub mitt e d that C forms
agains t supplies are pending and have not be e n provide d by
the defe n d a n t s to the plaintiff. Plaintiff is under gover n m e n t
tax liability as the s e forms have to be duly sub mitt e d to the
tax dep ar t m e n t within stipulat e d time fram e given by govt
tax dep a r t m e n t s .        The total invoice s value agains t C Forms
und er Affy Phar m a Pvt Ltd Rs.10,8 6, 5 4 2 and 5 % of which
amou n t to Rs.54,32 7/- .                  The total invoice value agains t C
Forms und er Affy Paren t e r al s is Rs.57,1 3, 1 4 8/- and 5 % of
which is Rs.2,85, 6 5 7 /- . The total amo u n t due to be paid by
the defe n d a n t s to the plaintiff sta n d s at Rs.36,5 7, 3 7 9/- plus
Rs.54,3 2 7 , plus Rs.2,85, 6 5 7 /- i.e. 39,97, 3 6 3 /- .                           It is furthe r
sub mitt e d that des pit e rep e a t e d thoug h belat e d alleg a tion s
of defect s and deficiency in the plaintiff's goods by the
defe n d a n t s , the defen d a n t s has continu e d to plac e orders
with the plaintiff for further ma n uf a c t u r e of goods.                                      This
support s the fact tha t the plaintiff's produc t s are of good
quality and pass the requisite test of quality ass ur a n c e .
The belat e d           and cooke d- up allega tion s                     of defec t s        are a
mer e tactic to avoid making pay m e n t s for the goods alre a dy
receive d by the defen d a n t s .                    Plaintiff suffer e d hug e losse s
on accou n t of this failure on the part of the defe n d a n t s to

CS No. 1056/16       M/s Affy Group of Companies Vs. M/s Aaltramed Health Care Ltd.      Page No. 5 of 10
 mak e pay m e n t s for the goods receive d and is, ther efor e
entitle d to the afore s aid amo u n t as well as amou n t s toward s
intere s t,       loss       of     profit,       addition al         follow        on     contr a c t,
opport u nity cost, overh e a d exp e n s e s , legal cost etc.
3.                 It is furth er sub mitt e d that plaintiff appro a c h e d
the defe n d a n t s           to settle the balanc e pay m e n t s                        and also
agains t         the     'C' form,          the     defen d a n t s        ass ur e d     com ple t e
remitt a n c e of the said amou n t within 60 days from receiving
the     sale       invoice s.             Howev er,            such     period          expire d      on
07.12. 2 0 1 4 and the plaintiff has till dat e not receive d any
pay m e n t from the defe n d a n t s .                    It is furthe r sub mitt e d that
legal notice date d 05.06. 2 0 1 5                        was sent by the plaintiff to
the defe n d a n t s . Howeve r, defe n d a n t s                       failed to mak e the
pay m e n t within the stipulat e d time. Henc e, the pres e n t suit.
4.                 Sum m o n s were issue d to the defe n d a n t s and the
defe n d a n t no. 1 & 2 were serve d. Howeve r, defe n d a n t s                                    did
not app e a r before the court and defe n d a n t no.1 & 2                                        were
proc e e d e d         ex- part e      vide order dat e d                08.05. 2 0 1 7 .          It is
pertine n t to me n tion that defe n d a n t no. 3 & 4 were dropp e d
from the array of partie s after recording the evide nc e of AR
Rajesh        Kumar           Mishar a        and       Ms. Vaishali Tanw ar,                    proxy
couns el for plaintiff vide order dat e d 18.02.2 0 2 0 pass e d by
the Ld. pred e c e s s o r .           PE was close d after recording ex- part e
evide n c e vide order dat e d 08.04.2 0 2 2 .


EX- PARTE PLAINTIFF'S EVIDENCE.


5.                 Plaintiff exa min e d                 its    AR Shri Rajahs                 Kumar

CS No. 1056/16         M/s Affy Group of Companies Vs. M/s Aaltramed Health Care Ltd.      Page No. 6 of 10
 Mishra as PW-1. He depo s e d in the affidavit reiter a ting the
plaint aver m e n t s and relied on:
     1. Ex. PW1/1- board resolution held on 07.08. 2 0 1 5 .
     2. Ex. PW1/2(OSR)- Copy                        of agre e m e n t           betw e e n     the
           plaintiff and the defe n d a n t dat e d 28.03. 2 0 1 2 .
     3. Ex. PW1/3 (colly)- comp u t e r gen e r a t e d invoices raise d
           agains t orders place d by the defe n d a n t .
     4. Ex.       PW1/4-          Comput e r            gen er a t e d        ledger         w.e.f.
           31.03. 2 0 1 4 to 20.03. 2 0 1 5 .
     5. Ex. PW1/5- Comput e r gen e r a t e d the C-forms.
     6. Ex. PW1/6 (OSR)- copy of regist e r e d partn e r s hip de e d
           of Affy     Pare nt e r als and Memor a n d u m and Article of
           Association alongwith certificat e                       of incorpor a tion           of
           M/s Affy Phar m a Pvt. Ltd.
     7. Ex. PW1/7- legal notice dat e d 05.06.2 0 1 5 .
     8. Ex. PW1/8- original post al rec eipt and regist er e d AD.
     9. Ex. PW1/9- courier receipt.
     10.          Ex. PW1/10- Certificat e u/s 65 B Evidenc e Act.


EX- PARTE FINAL ARGUMENTS


6.                Heard the ld. Couns el for plaintiff and perus e d
the record. It has be e n argu e d on beh alf of the plaintiff that
defe n d a n t s have defra u d e d the plaintiff. Defend a n t s did not
paid the said amou n t and bre a c h e d the trust of plaintiff. It is
furth er sub mitt e d that defe n d a n t s did not pay the amo u n t
rem ains upon the defe n d a n t s .                    He furth er argu e d             that a
decr e e for recov e ry of the suit amo u n t be pas s e d in favour

CS No. 1056/16     M/s Affy Group of Companies Vs. M/s Aaltramed Health Care Ltd.    Page No. 7 of 10
 of the plaintiff.


FINDINGS


7.               PW-1 in his testim o n y had reiter a t e d the plaint
aver m e n t s        and        furth er        sworn          that       an         amo u n t      of
Rs.39,9 7, 3 6 3/-            rem ain s        due      and       the     sa m e       amou n t       is
recov e r a bl e .      The said aver m e n t s                went unre b u t t e d            since
despit e service, the defe n d a n t s did not turn up to defe n d
the cas e and they were proce e d e d ex- part e.


8.               Howev e r, the point that arise s for consid er a tion
is "wheth er the plaintiff is entitled for the recov er y of the
suit amo u n t from the defe n d a n t s" ?


9.               To answ e r this point, the evide nc e is perus e d .
Plaintiff has prove d the following docu m e n t s i.e. Ex. PW1/1-
board resolution held on 07.08. 2 0 1 5 ; Ex. PW1/2(OSR)- Copy
of agre e m e n t betw e e n the plaintiff and the defe n d a n t dat e d
28.03. 2 0 1 2 ; Ex. PW1/3 (colly)- comp u t e r gen e r a t e d invoice s
raise d     agains t orders plac e d by the defen d a n t ; Ex. PW1/4-
Compu t e r           gen e r a t e d        ledger           w.e.f.        31.03.2 0 1 4            to
20.03. 2 0 1 5 ; Ex. PW1/5- Compu t e r gen e r a t e d the C-forms;
Ex. PW1/6 (OSR)- copy of regist er e d partn e r s hip dee d of
Affy         Pare nt e r al s         and       Memora n d u m              and         Article      of
Association alongwith certificat e of incorpor a tion of M/s Affy
Phar m a Pvt. Ltd; Ex. PW1/7- legal notice dat e d 05.06. 2 0 1 5 ;
Ex. PW1/8- original post al rec eipt and regist er e d AD; Ex.

CS No. 1056/16       M/s Affy Group of Companies Vs. M/s Aaltramed Health Care Ltd.      Page No. 8 of 10
 PW1/9- courier receipt; Ex. PW1/10- Certificat e u/s 65 B
Evidenc e Act            which show that defe n d a n t s had take n the
goods from the plaintiff.
10.               It is pertine n t to men tion that defen d a n t no. 3 &
4 were dropp e d from the array of partie s after recording the
evide n c e      of AR Rajesh Kumar Mishar a                              and Ms. Vaishali
Tanw ar,         proxy        couns el       for     plaintiff        vide        order         dat e d
18.02. 2 0 2 0 pass e d by the Ld. pred e c e s s o r . Henc e, no claim
agains t the defe n d a n t no. 3 & 4.
11.               It is       depo s e d      by     way       of      affidavit          that      the
defe n d a n t s exe c u t e d an agre e m e n t dat e d 28.03. 2 0 1 2 Ex.
PW1/2 betw e e n plaintiff and defe n d a n t s ther e b y defe n d a n t s
had und er t a k e n          that they            had to repay the amou n t of
goods within 60 days take n from the plaintiff. Furthe r, legal
notice      PW1/8         shows       that      defe n d a n t s       did not            paid      the
amou n t s       to     the      plaintiff.        The       testi mo n y           of     PW-1        is
corrobor a t e d by Ex. PW1/2, agre e m e n t                           dat e d 28.03.2 0 1 2
exec u t e d      by      defen d a n t s       in    favour         of        plaintiff.       Other
docu m e n t s        also      suppor t s         the      claim         of     plaintiff.         The
testimo n y of PW-1 is also corrobor a t e d by the docu m e n t a r y
evide n c e and also the sa m e rem ain s unre b u t t e d . There is
no    rea so n        to disbeliev e          the        testim o n y      of PW-1. Thus,
plaintiff is entitle d to an amo u n t of Rs. 39,97, 3 6 3 /- .
12.               As far as intere s t is conc er n e d , 18 % is a bit
exce s siv e .    More so, when                  nothing         has       be e n        plac e d    on
record to sugg e s t that the agr e e d rate of inter e s t was @ 18
% p.a.      Keeping in mind the prev ailing rate of intere s t s and
natur e of trans a c tion, it would be prope r and rea s o n a bl e to

CS No. 1056/16     M/s Affy Group of Companies Vs. M/s Aaltramed Health Care Ltd.         Page No. 9 of 10
 grant inter e s t @ 6% p.a. in view of Section 34 CPC.


RELIEF
13.              In view of abov e discus sion, plaintiff has be e n
able to prove his cas e. Hence, the following order:

                                            ORDER :

The suit of the plaintiff is decr e e d with costs. The defe n d a n t s no. 1 & 2 are direct e d to pay the plaintiff a sum of Rs.39,9 7, 3 6 3/- (Rupe e s Thirty Nine Lakhs Seve n Thous a n d Thre e Hundr e d and Sixty Three only) along with intere s t at the rate of 6 % per annu m from the dat e of filing of the pres e n t suit till realization of the amou n t . Decre e she e t be draw n accordingly.

File be consign e d to Record Room.

Digitally signed by RAJESH
                                                             RAJESH           KUMAR
                                                                              Date:
                                                             KUMAR            2022.06.06
                                                                              09:14:31
                                                                              +0100

Typed to the dictation directly,                             (Rajesh Kumar)
corrected and pronounced in                           Additional District Judge-03,
open court on 06.06.2022                              EAST/KKD Courts, Delhi.




CS No. 1056/16    M/s Affy Group of Companies Vs. M/s Aaltramed Health Care Ltd.      Page No. 10 of
10